sociology of sports

Monday, March 16, 2009

Sociology is the study of social life, social change, and the social causes and consequences of human behavior. Sociologists investigate the structure of groups, organizations, and societies, and how people interact within these contexts. Since all human behavior is social, the subject matter of sociology ranges from the intimate family to the hostile mob; from organized crime to religious cults; from the divisions of race, gender and social class to the shared beliefs of a common culture; and from the sociology of work to the sociology of sports. In fact, few fields have such broad scope and relevance for research, theory, and application of knowledge. The field also offers a range of research techniques that can be applied to virtually any aspect of social life: street crime and delinquency, corporate downsizing, how people express emotions, welfare or education reform, how families differ and flourish, or problems of peace and war.

Although sports sociology is a subdiscipline of exercise science, it is also a part of the parent discipline of sociology, which is the study of human behavior and social interactions within particular contexts. Sports sociology examines sports as a part of cultural and social life, and adds a different dimension and perspective to the study of sports and exercise. More specifically, sports sociology examines the relationship between sports and society and seeks answers to many issues and questions regarding sports and culture.

Sports are a pervasive part of culture and are considered to be social constructions within society created by groups of individuals and based on values, interests, needs, and resources. Sport forms are created by groups of individuals. Each culture creates and uses sports for its own purposes; therefore, sports take different forms from culture to culture.

This directly relates to the concept of physical activity and exercise for different cultures.Because of various factors, such as religion, politics, and economics, certain groups of individuals may have limited access or be restricted or forbidden to take part in sports and/or exercise activities. Thus the value of sports takes on different meanings in different cultures. Other factors, such as which controls sports, what rewards (intrinsic or extrinsic) are received from sports participation and the status of the athlete/participant, have some effect on the value and place of sports in a particular society. The purpose of this chapter is to familiarize the student with the social issues that permeate society and thus permeate sports.

Sociology is the study of social life, social change, and the social causes and consequences of human behavior. Sociologists investigate the structure of groups, organizations, and societies, and how people interact within these contexts.Since all human behavior is social, the subject matter of sociology ranges from the intimate family to the hostile mob; from organized crime to religious cults; from the divisions of race, gender and social class to the shared beliefs of a common culture; and from the sociology of work to the sociology of sports. In fact, few fields have such broad scope and relevance for research, theory, and application of knowledge.Sociology provides many distinctive perspectives on the world, generating new ideas and critiquing the old. The field also offers a range of research techniques that can be applied to virtually any aspect of social life: street crime and delinquency, corporate downsizing, how people express emotions, welfare or education reform, how families differ and flourish, or problems of peace and war. Because sociology addresses the most challenging issues of our time, it is a rapidly expanding field whose potential is increasingly tapped by those who craft policies and create programs. Sociologists understand social inequality, patterns of behavior, forces for social change and resistance, and how social systems work.The mission of the Augusta State University sociology program is to teach and employ sociological theory and knowledge to empower our students and to contribute to a better society. We seek to explore and reveal how society and culture shape human lives, thoughts, and behaviors. Through teaching the skills of sociological analysis, research, writing, and social action, we strive to make our students more effective and valuable as citizens, scholars, and professionals.

Sociology of Sport Onlinesosol is an international electronic forum for the stimulation and dissemination of research concepts and theory relating to the sociological examination of sport, physical education and coaching. The journal publishes theoretical and empirical papers, critical literature reviews and conventional book reviews.

The Political Economy of Sports There are several structuralcharacteristics of a political economy approach upon which Itouched earlier and would like to develop a bit here. The firstand most general point I want to emphasize is that the character ofsports varies with the mode of production of the society in whichit appears. The history of sports parallels the history of humansociety. In each of the five great modes of organization for socialproduction, sports and the world of serious activity has beenmutually inter-dependent. In primitive communal societies, inslave, feudal, capitalist or socialist society, sports has beenshaped by the dominant mode of production. Contemporary sports: Football, basketball, soccer, track andfield events have their origins in inter-tribal, inter-feudal and inter-capitalist warfare. Football probably started out as a predator village kicked the heads ofconquered neighbors around. Baseball is little else but theskilled use of the bludgeon. Field events: shot put, javelin,hammer throw and archery all come out of the weaponry of feudalwarfare. Such events as the marathon, the hurdles, the obstacle course,the dash and the relay recapitulate the structure of fieldcommunication in the various military encounters between low techarmies from the wars between city-states in ancient Greece to thecrusades through the feudal conquests of France, Britain,Scandinavia and the African nations. The modern assimilation of sports to military goals came in1811 when the Germans were occupied by the armies of Napoleon. Themass calisthenics which later came to be associated with theJugendschaften of the Hitler era, were encouraged as prelude to theoverthrow of the French oppressors by German patriots. In our times, sports is shaped more by the commercial needs ofadvanced monopoly capital. There are several points at which itsneeds shape the structure and development of sports. The mostsignificant structural change in modern sports is the gradual andcontinuing commodification of sports. This means that the social,psychological, physical and cultural uses of sports are assimilatedto the commercial needs of advanced monopoly capital. The Realization 'Problem'If you have ever wondered why sports stars get such high salariesand why major sports have so much time/space on mass media,the answer is simple.A major use to which sports are put by commodity capitalistsis in the solution to the "realization problem." Given theprofit motive, capitalist firms produce more than their workers canbuy. This happens for two reasons. First, workers collectively donot get paid 100% of the price set by the market. For any givenfirm labor costs are about 25-35% of the price set. Across allworkers who share in the division of the profits, the wages areless than 100 percent of the price available with which to purchasethe goods they produce. In low profit lines, workers may have 95% of the valueproduced; in high profit lines of production, they may have lessthan 50% of the value of the wealth they produce. Whatever thecase they can't buy it all. In such a case, the economy tends toslow down to recession or depression levels. There are severalways to renew demand each with other problems- warfare destroys wealth and renews demand.A prolonged recession renews demand.Price wars dispose of surplus production but benefit big competitors.Crime requires replacement of items stolen.The welfare state redistributes wealth.Credit and deficit spending can keep the system going a while longer.Capitalists compete for foreign markets and try to capture surplus value fromforeign economies with which to renew demandHowever, a major way to dispose of "surplus" goods and realize profit is totransfer desire from the world of cultural events; sports, theatre, religion orpatriotism to the world of commodity production via advertising. The inability of a capitalist firm to dispose of "surplus"production leads corporations to purchase sports programming as acommodity to generate demand by using the beauty and elegance ofathletics as an envelope in which to insert a commercial message. Extracting Surplus Income. A second structural feature of advancedmonopoly capitalism which besets the accumulation process is thegreat inequality of income distribution among those who do work for wage labor. The Yuppie portion of the population has discretionary incomeas do most elements of the capital class, but in the capitalistsystem today a few million people get around 40 percent of thatwealth and hundreds of millions share less than 50 percent of thewealth. In America, the bottom 20 percent of the population shareonly five percent of the gross national product. A lot of money tobe sure but far less than is required to purchase all the cars,beer, refrigerators, cigarettes, and other items produced. The few million who do have surplus income and could purchasethe surplus production don't need the fourth car, the fifthtelevision set or the tenth toaster. This distortion in incomemeans, again, that capitalists can't realize profit. A third reasonthat there is a surplus of goods is the tendency in capitalistsystems to disemploy workers by the use of new technology or byincreased productivity from each worker. These disemployed workers join the surplus population. Theirmaterial needs may be met by the state in its welfare system, byfamily members, by private charity or by friends. Again many turnto crime as a way to reunite production and distribution. So, inorder to dispose of the surplus production on profitable terms,capitalist firms turn to advertising to create an ever expandinglayer of false needs and wants among those who may havediscretionary income. Or try to expand markets overseas to thedisadvantage of capitalists in other countries who also have thesame realization problem. Since sports events generate large audiences and participants(for any or all of the reasons mentioned earlier: the alienatedsolidarity, the alienated sexuality or the alienated aesthetics ofplay), advertising firms buy the audiences and sell them tocapitalist firms which are large enough to have national marketsand wealthy enough to pay the costs of the audience, thecommercials, the media time and the teams involved. Apart from thefact that this solution to the problem of capitalist productiongreatly inflates costs of distribution and apart from the fact thatsmall firms tend to fail, the real problem of this growing alliancebetween sports and capitalism is the linkage between mythicconcerns of a society and profit concerns of private capital. Cultural Marxist Analysis of Sports. In brief the argument in Cultural Marxism is that sports has absorbedsome of the religious needs of a secular society for solidarity andfor a metaphysic. The analysis of sports presented here is that it embodies elementsof four great founding myths of society -- especially that of a moralitymetaphysic which instructs players and fans alike about how toapproach the problematics of interpersonal interaction; how torelate oneself to the social unit, and how to confront theimponderables of nature and other groups. It seems to me that it is this morality metaphysic which sointrigues and so engrosses fans in the actions and outcomes of asports event. It is this morality metaphysic which can be used asan envelop in which to insert advertisements. To understand therise of commodity sports in America, we need to connect thepolitical economy of capitalism to alienated social life. Every society has four general myths which help reproduce itacross generations. The first great myth is, of course, thecreation myth. The second myth and the one used here is themorality myth -- one which instructs us on how we are to deal withthe ordinary contingencies of life, how we are to relate to othersinside and outside our group.Morality myths instruct us about the forms of evil, the sourcesof evil, the agents of evil and the solutions for evil. A third great myth form is one which tells us how to understand andsurvive the inevitable tragedies which is the common lot of all people --what to do about death, about love gone wrong, about children gone wrongand about the imponderables of life. The fourth great mythic form speaks to the future and tothe failings of the past in that social formation itself. Thisfourth mythic form usually says that times were good before, theyturn bad through no fault of the system and they will be good againif one has faith. A myth is a line of symbolic activity -- activity in music, inactivity, in mime or in words -- which grasps the basic concerns ofa society and resolves the conflict and contradictions inherent insocial life in its chronology and in the logic of its action(Silverstone, 1983:138). The simplicity of the sports event is especially amenable tomythic use. In the play, the protagonist must overcome adversityin society and in nature. Each play and player must, to besuccessful as a mythic element, transcend everyday activity. Thegame is trans-parent in its play and unlike written or narratedmyths has no foregone conclusion. Every fan has the same standingas do all others. In those crucial moments of play, a satisfactoryevent is anticipated and recognized by all present. One does notneed a priestly functionary to interpret the mysteries as inreligious myths. In that respect, sports may be experienceddirectly for its aesthetic and mythic meanings. The structure of sports as a mythic form is aboutsocialization under conditions of conflict. In feudal society; incompetitive capitalist societies with class as well as ethnicconflict; in the world capitalist system with its nationalisticantagonisms, the mythic structure of modern adversary sportsresonates with the lived experiences of workers, Blacks, thirdworld patriots as well as partisans of geographical animosity. Allstress the need for the individual to accept and to work within theexisting structure of social conflict and "friendly" competition.Commodity capital, with its internal crises and contradictionshas assimilated the mythic form to its own needs for survival, forprofit, for socialization to competitive, aggressive, privatizedcharacter as well as for legitimacy with workers, consumers andcitizens who are its natural antagonists. I raise the questionabout whether American sports in its commodity form -- howeverexcellent and appealing -- should be harnessed to the ideologicalneeds of a given class or elite in any society. The view advancedhere is that sports, indeed all cultural activities, might betterbe oriented to the general social interest in authentic solidarityand prosocial cooperation rather than the special character andconsumer morality of monopoly capital.Every social group needs to use the awe and mystery of myth,magic, pretend, rehearsal, play and the world of imaginationand make- believe to the reproduction of cultural forms. All sports activities are mythic endeavors in which the forcesof life are pitted against the forces of nature. In the case offootball, basketball, baseball and, more intensely tennis, theeffort to control a ball pushes the player to the limits ofpsychobiological capacity and endurance. The catch takes on addeddrama if it occurs in a strategic moment of play. Still moredramatic impact arises should the moment of play be located in astrategic game or even in a moment of note in the entire history ofa league or nation. The means by which conflict is to be resolved is by excellentindividual performance within the logics of team goals. In arecent (18 July 1983) Monday Night Baseball game, the shortstop ofthe Toronto Blue Jays made four such plays in that single game.Few persons on earth could have made the moves as swiftly, asgracefully or as accurately and with the panache displayed. Thegrace, beauty and art possible from the human body shown forthclearly in that game. In like fashion, the extension of the physical capacity of thehuman body in making spectacular catches in football is even moreremarkable taking place as they do in the face of expert defensiveplay by the opposing team. Most of those who watch football knowand appreciate those catches, the moves for which match in graceand timing the finest of ballet. By themselves, this physicalexcellence is only of passing interest -- observed only for thepurest of aesthetic reasons as indeed one may appreciate ballet.But unlike most ballet today, sports games are located insignificant social frames within which they take on mythic force. In a world series, with the bases loaded and two out, and withthe score tied in the ninth, a long fly ball is immediatelyanticipated as a dramatic event. As the center fielder races back,gauges the flight, lifts off the ground in every effort, whetherthe catch is made or whether the ball clears the 430 foot marker,the partisan crowd is on its feet as one, explodes in a cheer ofdelight as one and appreciates that all others present share thegrand moment. The soaring grace of the fielder's catch or theperfect timing and power of the batsman testify to the possibilityof human success in everyday life. That is what the myth -- andthe game -- is all about. As noted, the sports event teaches us four things: it tellsus what the sources of evil are, it tells us who the agent of evilis (often conceived as the enemy), it instructs us in the forms ofevil, and it instructs us in the means by which evil is to beovercome. In the case of baseball, the source of travail is to be foundin the physical forces of nature; time, space, gravity, weather andlight. The sources of evil are found as well in the individualimperfections of the players: the lazy player, the inept player,the foolish player, the cheating player, the selfish player, andthe indifferent player. Evil is to betray one's teammates tosloth, greed, envy, pride, anger and hate. If not the unproductive team member, the agent of evil is theoutsider. For most major sports, it is the visiting team. Highschool and college sports set as enemy the opposing team much morethan do the professional teams although in baseball, everyone hatesthe Yankees; in football for years it was the Chicago Bears and inbasketball the Boston Celtics who embodied adversity. The particular forms of evil embodied these teams entailedunfair tactics, dirty play, illegal recruiting, purchasing ofpennants and players as well as architectural innovations of thefield of play which gave unfair advantage to the other team. When combined, the forms and agents of evil as embodied in themythic structure of sports teaches a lesson. It says the tribe isthe paramount unit of social order, the enemy is other neighboringtribes; they cheat and thus are less than human. This defaultrenders the home tribe the embodiment of the human being in itshighest, most principled form -- however, since the opposing teamviolates the rules of social life found in the sports event, itexcludes itself from the normal courtesies of social conduct. Suchself exclusion in turn justifies less-than-social treatment of theenemy. By this practical logic, the home tribe at once justifiesnoncompliance with social rules and in the same moment preservesthe home tribe myth of superior moral standing. If the Yankees buy up all the best players, they default onthe rules and may be subjected to tactics otherwise inconceivable.Since the Chicago Bears hit, gouge, kick and pile on, theydisqualify themselves as equals and may be hit, gouged, and kickedwithout culpable wrong imputed to the home team. Since the Celticsuse picks, fast breaks, double-teaming, presses, and platoonsubstitution tactics; since they grab the super stars from collegeranks and use the home court advantage in extremis, they also arethe embodiment of evil for all other home teams -- and the Celtics,Bears, and Yankees view the Philadelphia Warriors, the Green BayPackers, and the Dodgers as less than human. In the Marxian analysis presented here, sports have beencommodified and massified in response to some of the structuralproblems of advanced monopoly capitalism. A separate but parallelanalysis is possible for bureaucratic socialist economies or thesemi-feudalities in the Mid-East and Far-East. In brief, sports solves the problems of accumulation andlegitimacy in the ways mentioned above. Sports in its present formpresents us with a modern metaphysic for daily life. It redeems,in a false and trivial manner, alienated conditions of work. Itprovides alienated solidarity in a conflict ridden society. Itssuper-masculine model of play offers to redeem an alienatedsexuality. And its aesthetics and metaphysics provide an envelopeinto which to insert a message vesting desire into possession ofmaterial goods rather than in primary social relations. In a finalsection, I would like to add to this cultural analysis of sports,a structural analysis of advertising since the advertising industryis the enterprise which uses the metaphysics and aesthetics ofsports to colonize social desire in the interest of private profit. This analysis is part of a larger analysis of the use of dramaturgyin society to manage the political and economic problems of classcleavages, racial conflict, gender preference and bureaucraticauthority in mass society. The major thesis of this work is that the technologies ofelectronics, theatre, and the social sciences; sociology, as wellas psychology, are used conjointly to mystify consciousness andsubvert democratic and collective political possibilities in theinterests of class elites as well as other elites within the worldcapitalist system (and in bureaucratic socialist societies). This technology provides a slick, smooth, scientific way topreserve privilege in a putatively democratic society. The crudeand disruptive politics of fascism are replaced by an $80 billionindustry of dramaturgical practitioners in the advertising industrywhose only productive labor is to serve elites in the extraction ofsurplus value and creation of false consciousness. Commoditysports is but one expression of the alienation of the lively artsto the managerial needs of capitalism. Commodity politics,theatric commercials, electronic religion as well as the spectaclesof space and war all converge to use dramaturgy in the sociology offraud to serve power, privilege and the great wealth ofmultinational corporations. Advertising and Commodity Sports I have suggested that commodity sports a metaphysic about how todo life. Located within the problems of commodity capitalism,sports lends itself as a particularly effective tool for advertising. If the morality myth embedded in sports resonates with the livedexperience of fans, advertising resonates with the structuralfeatures of advanced monopoly capital. In an automated, productive economic system the main problemof the capitalist is to realize profit. The shift is from theexploration of the working class to the extraction of surplus valuefrom the consumer. To do this it is necessary to use science andguile rather than coercion and discipline. The modern corporationcannot force the consumer as readily as it can coerce the employee.It turns to depth psychology and social science to generate demand.Monopoly capital uses advertising to solve the problem ofaccumulation and of legitimacy.Advertising uses the drama and mythic power of sports to generatedemand and to realize profit for advanced monopoly capital. There is also the shift from price and quality to generatedemand. It is not possible to use pricing to generate demand in astable monopoly system (Baran and Sweezy, 1976:115). Were one ofthe ten or so giants which dominate a product line to resort toprice as a demand mechanism, it would destabilize the entireindustry with devastating results for many. Quality cannot be usedto generate demand for several reasons. There are the additionalcosts of quality; there is industrial espionage which quickly endsany advantage a new improvement might bring. There is theprofitable parts and repair industry and most of all there is theadvantage of built-in obsolescence for future demand -- all ofwhich militates against quality -- and for advertising. Theproducts advertised nationally are products from the monopolysector. Products from the competitive sector of the state sectorare seldom advertised on mass media. A third thesis on advertising relates more directly to therealization problem. A capitalist economy can only realize profit if all products are sold.But since workers do not have 100% of the price of a product paid tothem directly or indirectly, capitalist economies tend to have surpluseswhich are not readily absorbed by workers taken collectively --and the tiny handful of capitalists could not use all the gas, beer, autos,chain saws and sanitary napkins produced -- so they must create aneurotic need for such surplus purchasing. They must generatelayer upon layer of desire and they use the elegance of professionalbaseball, football, basketball and soccer to do so. Commodity sports with its morality lessons provides an envelopin which to hide the compulsion to consume apart from need, apartfrom merit, apart from other needs, apart from thought and words.Advertising, of course, cannot increase demand for all commoditiesbut can shift demand from commodity A to commodity B.Fourthly, advertising is the cheapest way to reach millions ofpeople. Commission sales only works in very special circumstances.In cons or swindles, in real estate and other super high profit,high growth lines, face to face sales can be used but not in masssales with low profit margins. So in the U.S., it is the structural needs of advancedmonopoly capital in general by which one can best understand thegrowth in broadcast sports. And it is the morality myth embeddedin sports which connects compulsive needs of the consumer with thecompulsive needs for profit. Other myths may be also used tocreate demand -- on day-time television, oriented to the alienatedhouse-wife, a differing myth is used to envelop demand -- that ofthe competent woman, still attractive and able to cope with themany failings of husband, children and neighbors. Such women usethe household budget (about 60% of family income) to marshal thesupplies to sustain her social skills. Advertising capital furnished by monopoly industries at onceencourages the production of cherished cultural supplies such assports and transforms these in the same moment into their alienatedform. A whole host of unproductive labor is used to reuniteproduction and distribution on profitable terms for the monopolycapitalist beset by increasing costs of production, increasinglegal restraints on dangerous practices, increasing foreigncompetition, decreasing markets in the unfree world, and decreasingfreedom to control third-world supplies. Advertising is anecessity in this time of crisis for monopoly capital. Sports isa happy cultural activity upon which capitalism may parasitize --for a while. Conclusion. There are many ways to understand the hugeinvestment a society allocates to sports and to other athleticactivity. At any given level of analyses there are significant andimportant validities upon which to focus depending upon theinterests and concerns of the critical scholar. In the previoussection of this paper, the focus has been the mythic character ofthe rules and lines of play in contemporary American sportsculture. In the earlier section, the focus was upon the politicaleconomy in which sports are located. A political-economy approach to sports examines how and why ithas been commodified. The Marxian view is that commodity sports isused by advertising to generate demand in an economic system inwhich demand is restricted by profit considerations, by monopolypractices, and by a continuing discrepancy between aggregate wageand aggregate price across all capitalist lines of production. Theneed for profit in advanced monopoly capitalism results in everypossible good or service be commodified. Sports is commodified andsold to the largest corporations in order to add dimensions ofdesire and false need to products without intrinsic value to thosewith discretionary income. That so many people invest so much time, emotion and money inthese pursuits instructs us that something important is happening.It is the view advanced here that sports has gradually absorbed thereligious impulse of a secular society, commodified it incapitalist societies and is in the process of assimilating thatimpulse to the economic and legitimacy needs of capitalism. Perhapsthere are better ways to understand sports but I know no better forthe present organization of American sports. The analysis here presents a given sports event as an instanceof one or more of the four great myths found in a society withwhich to instruct its young people in the metaphysics of human lifeas it is constructed in that culture. The four myths are: theCreation Myth, the Morality Myth, the Tragic Myth, and the DestinyMyth. All interesting novels, plays, poems and sports eventsincorporate the structures of one or more of these myths into itsstory line. The Morality myth of advanced capitalist society suffuses thestructure and chronology of the contemporary sports events in theUnited States. Competition, the resultant system of individualstars and individual viewers, the emphasis upon playing within therules set by a small non-playing elite, the constant push bycoaches and managers for greater productivity, for personalexcellence and for uncritical acceptance of the authority systemall resonate with the problematics of capitalist production inshop, office, school and factory: competition, discipline,creativity, teamwork, victory, and alienated joy. As an embodiment of a mythic form which instructs all personsconcerned, fans and players alike, on how to live out one's life ina laudable and praiseworthy style, sports supplements, complementsand in some instances, displaces the sacred writings of the Bibleand the Church Fathers. In a secular society, the drama of sportsevents absorb and bend the quest for the sacred to the profitconcerns; to the control needs of the rich and the powerful. It is this concern with the morality myth which so intriguesand so captures the fan and the player. We all need a metaphysicfor the shaping of our everyday behavior. Professional football,baseball, basketball, volleyball and soccer, each in its differingformat, provides us with such a morality. I suggest there is a basic incompatibility with commercialsports and the longer historical interests of a society. I proposethat a society which permits its mythic forms in sports to bepurchased as a commodity, mortgages its future to the rich and thepowerful. In this case, it is the private capitalist firm whichhas absorbed sports to its ideological, political and economicneeds. Such commodification of sports ceases to serve the generalsocial interest in morality, in solidarity, and in excellence ofindividual effort when these interests are confined within thespecial interests of the capitalist firm for profit, forlegitimacy, for growth and for control of markets, material and fora complacent labor force. The argument presented here is that there is much of socialvalue found in sports and in other mythic carriers. Given thesocial utility of morality myths and the great investment of time,talent and concern with sports in America, the significant questionto raise is whether a society should so organize that talent andtime of athletes, artists and actors to serve interests of privateprofit. Corollary to that question is whether other forms ofsports, other modalities of morality, other structures of mythsmight not better serve the social interest or the human project. In this respect, the sociology of sport fits within a largerframework of the political economy in which it is found. The usualapproach to the study of sports sociology surgically isolatessports from the society in which it is found and from the contentand outcomes of the cultural activities. One should keep in mindthat it is the cultural activities -- ranging from family life toreligious life and embracing art, music, science, games, leisuretime activities as well as politics and parties -- which give lifeits distinctly human character. Work, food, shelter, health careand survival skills are basic to life but the creation of culturein all its forms is basic to human life. The propensity is to trivialize the sociology of music,theatre, sports, folk arts and their economic and political meaningof these. A Marxian theory reclaims these cultural activities andlocates them in a research endeavor which emancipates them onceagain to celebrate distinctly social and collective endeavors.

Sport sociology 2000Dr. Kathleen Armour, Dr. Robyn Jones & Daniel KerryBrunel University, EnglandThe purpose of this paper is to consider ways in which Sport Sociology can be valued as a discipline within sport sciences1, within sociology and within the world of sport which it analyses and serves. Brooker & Macdonald (1995), among others, point to the high status which society accords to the natural sciences, and note that this is also mirrored in physical education and sport sciences. Yiannakis & Greendorfer (1992) suggest that the broad field of sociology has "failed the litmus test" (p.5) of providing answers and solutions to society's social ills, and that within sport sciences, sport sociology is similarly deemed to be irrelevant to the practical needs of sport and sports practitioners. Ingham & Donnelly (1997) question the value of a sociology of sport, and challenge us to consider whether a "deliberate commitment to a sociology of sport is re-required" (p.392), while Loy & Sage (1997) suggest that sport sociology has reached a stage in its development where "a sociology of the sociology of sport now seems appropriate" (p.315). Sport sociology 2000 is, therefore, a title representing a deceptively straightforward mission. In essence, it is a plea for sport sociology to build upon its sound and expanding traditions of the 1980s and 1990s, and to grow. In order to do this, it is suggested in this paper that sport sociology must mature into an applied, inclusive, and cooperative (then collaborative) discipline in the next century. 1. Sport sociology within sport sciences: Defining the taskThe central purpose of Sport Sciences is to study that conglomerate of mind, body and spirit which is the embodiment of sport and a wide range of physical activities. That embodiment is, inevitably, a social being - a member of society; and not just any society of course, as Ingham & Beamish (1997) remind us in their analysis of the 'enculturation of the social subject' (p160). A social being cannot escape society in order to participate in sport, rather, society consists of structures and agents who constitute - and reconstitute - sport, and sport sciences. Thus, the purpose of sport sociology is clear: it must study the sports/exercise person (at whatever level) as a social being in a particular social context; it must study social structures which endure and which have influence, and it has a self-appointed, moral imperative to study the processes and the outcomes of inequality (Donnelly, 1996) and ignorance in sport. It is, fundamentally, a complex, person-centred venture located within the multifarious facets and levels of sport, including elite sport and performance, coaching, health/exercise, social sport, and sport/physical education in schools.But why restate the obvious? Well, if the above is anything like accurate, it is useful to be reminded that embarking upon sport sociology (indeed any sociology) is a daunting venture. The obvious leads to the obvious - those working in the area need all the tools available to them. Thus, there are positivist and anti-positivist adherents, qualitative and quantitative methods and, among others, critical, figurational, feminist, interpretive and historical paradigms. Love them or hate them, a mature discipline may need them all because the questions to be asked are intricate and obstinate; as Chalip (1992) points out 'In the real world, problems and needs are multifaceted and multidisciplinary' (p.262). Furthermore, the answers, like the social beings themselves, resist categorisation into neat paradigms; how much simpler if they did not! 2. On being 'applied'In terms of its development towards maturity, Sport Sociology can best be described as a late adolescent/early adult. In the key text 'Sport and Social Theory', Rees & Miracle (1986) note that research in Sport Sociology had been criticised in terms of both its quality and quantity. They cited the plea by Loy, Kenyon & McPherson (1980) that sport sociology research ought to be more clearly grounded in social theory. Indeed, the whole purpose of Rees & Miracle's text was to show the importance of social theory to 'the development of sociology of sport' and to 'encourage readers to start their search for answers to questions about sociology of sport from some theoretical perspective' with the ultimate aim of achieving 'wider acceptance of the utility of sociology of sport among sociologists and sport practitioners alike' (p.vii). It is encouraging to see how far sport sociology has come since 1986. A glance at any of the international journals in the field provides ample evidence of sport sociology grounded in social theory. Perhaps, as a direct result of this, sport sociology may become more widely accepted within sociology - although Sage (1997b) remains sceptical. Two examples could be viewed as encouraging, however: one is the invitation to sport sociologists to present at the 1998 British Sociological Association Annual Conference in Edinburgh (April 6-9), and the second is the conference link between the International Sociology of Sport Association and the International Sociological Association (Montreal, July 26-August 1, 1998).Arguably, where sport sociology has been less successful is in its attempts to gain greater acceptance among sports practitioners, and it is that issue which underpins this discussion. A paper by Luschen, within the Rees & Miracle (1986) text, makes a useful starting point. Luschen (1986) points out that 'the topic of the practical uses of sport sociology is not often discussed' (p.245), and he advocates a theory of 'action knowledge'. Interestingly, he envisaged that such a focus on 'applied' research would lead to enhanced academic respectability within the broader field of sociology. As he notes: 'sociology itself has yet to resolve this critical link between theory and practice' (p.245). Luschen's (1986) suggestion was that sport sociology ought to focus upon developing 'action knowledge' which he described as follows:Action knowledge, in general, does not mean simple recommendations of a concrete and normative nature...The program of action knowledge aims for a deeper and more rational understanding based on explanatory knowledge and situative considerations. (p.248)The primary purpose of action knowledge is to inform policy and planning and, to this end, action research is identified as a way of ensuring that policy and implementation are compatible. Luschen (1986) was, however, cautious about the scope of action knowledge - warning that it is not to be viewed as 'utopian engineering' (p.251). Nonetheless, he views it as essential knowledge for a range of professionals in sport: 'teachers, coaches, administrators, journalists and executives.....certainly need it to better understand their own position and action in modern sport' (p.253). We would wish to add sports participants/performers themselves to the list.It may be that Luschen's thinking was ahead of its time. Perhaps there was a need to become securely rooted in social theory, before progress towards practicalities could be made. Certainly, there is some recent work which seems to reinforce Luschen's earlier thoughts. Yiannakis & Greendorfer (1992) try to develop the case for applied research by clarifying the definition of 'applied' as: 'providing solutions to questions of practical importance, assisting in changing behaviour, and contributing to the amelioration of the human condition' (p.11, their emphases). They also point to the need to disseminate research information widely and effectively within the broad sports community. Chalip (1992) similarly exhorts sport sociologists to work more closely with the sports community, which 'requires applied sport sociology to be the enterprise of a disputatious, many-valued community of scholars who work in collaboration with the persons, groups and communities they study' (p.259). More recently still, Feingold (1997) draws together some of these views in his arguments for 'service-based scholarship' to provide a new focus for academia in general, and sport sociology in particular. Drawing upon Boyer's (1990) vision for higher education, which urges scholars to 'think about the usefulness of knowledge, reflect on the social consequences of their work and, in so doing, gain an understanding of how their own study relates to the worlds beyond the campus' (p.69), Feingold points to the work of Don Sabo and others to make a plea for 'social theorists to participate in the social construction of community' (p.352). Thus, Feingold suggests that we must 'expand our impact upon society through an integration of the subdisciplines [and] a more holistic view of our commitment' (p.353). In a similar approach, Martinek & Hellison (1997) argue for 'service-bonded inquiry' in the context of physical education. They argue that sport pedagogy has reached a crossroads in its development:There is the road to traditional forms of research. Those who travel it are researchers who produce information about practice with little connection to those who use it. Completing this path leads to clear, identifiable rewards for researchers, such as publication in journals and recognition by the professional academies. The other road has few travelers other than practitioners...With few travelers the road is rough, undefined, and often void of tangible rewards.....Do we continue to journey down the path producing knowledge for only a secret enclave of scholars, or can we also venture down the path that brings relevance to real life conditions? (p.107/8).Martinek & Hellison (1997) describe service-bonded scholars as those who have made a personal commitment to improving physical activity for young people, and they suggest that 'a combination of perception, passion and purpose' (p.112) is likely to drive the researcher along an agenda of seeking change for the better. They also suggest that such an approach will prevent researchers from simply addressing the '"hot topic" of the times' (p.112). Similar to Luschen (1986), Martinek and Hellison highlight the need for 'action-based' research. They also raise the issue of dissemination: 'the ideas from service-bonded inquiry need to be shared with practitioners...rather than being restricted to high-quality journals read by a few colleagues' (p.116). It would appear that something like a movement in sport sociology is gathering pace.3. On being inclusiveSage (1997a) points out that sport sociology, like sociology more generally, has tended to include a wide range of methodological and theoretical paradigms. He notes, however, that there is still little consensus between the various approaches: 'It remains a discipline with several theoretical paradigms vying for hegemony within the field' (p.121). Evidence from the recent conference of the North American Society for the Sociology of Sport (NASSS, Toronto, November 5-8, 1997), and the ensuing discussions on 'Sportsoc', the NASSS-led electronic discussion group, confirms Sage's point. After the conference, a journalist who had attended posted a fairly blunt personal review of the event. In essence, he criticised the organisers, presenters and delegates for ineffective presentation, incoherent academic content and intolerant debate after papers. He reserved particular venom for some of the feminist contributions. Unsurprisingly, the response from sport sociologists varied from qualified support to unqualified hostility. Some threads from the ensuing discussion are interesting in the context of 'inclusiveness'. (The full discussion is best accessed from the sportsoc listserv):

The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education: An Introductory Readerby Anthony Laker. 240 pgs.Read the complete book The Sociology of Sport and Physical Education: An Introductory Reader by becoming a questia.com member. Choose a membership plan to an academic-level library with more than 67,000 full-text books, 1.5 million articles, an entire reference set with a dictionary, encyclopedia, thesaurus plus a collection of digital tools to organize your information.